Authored by Felicity Bradstock via OilPrice.com,

• Labour is raising taxes and environmental standards on North Sea oil and gas while refusing to issue new licences, but insists hydrocarbons will remain part of the UK’s energy mix.

• Wood Mackenzie research suggests up to 14 billion barrels of recoverable reserves may remain, far higher than regulator estimates, fuelling debate over future drilling.

• The government is pushing for a just transition toward renewables while the Conservatives promise to remove net-zero requirements and maximise North Sea extraction.

Since the Labour Party came into office in the U.K. last year, many have wondered if oil and gas drilling will continue or whether we will witness an all-out shift to renewable energy. Prime Minister Kier Starmer has introduced stricter taxes on fossil fuel companies since coming into power, but has also said that oil and gas will continue as part of the energy mix for as long as it makes sense. So, as the investor environment in the U.K. North Seas becomes ever murkier, what can we expect?

In June, the U.K. government introduced stricter environmental regulations for fossil fuel companies with projects in the North Sea. Oil and gas firms must now account for the environmental impact of emissions from using or burning the fuels extracted. This follows a decision by a Scottish court earlier in the year, deeming the approval of Shell’s Jackdaw and Equinor and Ithaca Energy’s Rosebank unlawful, meaning they required reassessment by the government.

While existing oil and gas projects can continue in the North Sea, albeit with companies paying higher taxes, the government has said it would not issue any new oil and gas licences, as it invests in a shift to green. This marks a distinct move away from the energy policy of the previous Conservative government, which strongly backed U.K. oil and gas operations. Oil and gas companies operating in the North Sea are taxed at around 78 percent, including the Energy Profits Levy introduced in 2022.

During his recent visit to the U.K., United States President Donald Trump discussed the country’s oil and gas potential. Trump said, “You have a great asset here, and we spoke about it: it’s called the North Sea.”

He added, “The North Sea oil is phenomenal… I want this country to do well, and you have great assets that you’re going to start using, I believe, under this Prime Minister,” addressing Starmer.

He said that his pro-fossil fuel agenda in the U.S. had helped drive down fuel prices and slowed inflation – even though fuel prices have actually risen since Trump came to office. 

In response, Starmer said that the Labour government plans to maintain a pragmatic approach to the country’s future energy mix, continuing to use North Sea oil and gas as required. He also emphasised the importance of reducing energy costs for consumers. Starmer said, “The mix will include oil and gas for many years to come from the North Sea – we’ve been clear about that for some time. But we also need to mix that with renewables, and it’s the mix that’s really important.” 

However, some believe that the government should be supporting U.K. oil and gas more strongly, as the North Sea still shows significant potential. The research company Wood Mackenzie recently estimated that there could be up to 14 billion barrels worth of recoverable oil and gas in existing North Sea fields, which is three times bigger than the four billion barrels estimated to remain by the U.K. regulator, the North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA). The analysis was AI-powered and assessed the “recovery rates” – the proportion of oil and gas that can be viably extracted from the fields.

The report stated, “If UK fields were able to match recovery factors from analogous global fields, an additional 9 percent could be recovered. If best-in-class recovery factors were matched, an additional 18 percent of recovery could be added… These scenarios would potentially add seven and 14 billion barrels of additional production, respectively, over the lives of the 100 largest fields.”

In contrast to the Labour government, the Conservative opposition recently said that it would remove all net-zero requirements on oil and gas companies drilling in the North Sea if elected. The party leader, Kemi Badenoch, said the Party has a policy of “maximising extraction” to get “all our oil and gas out of the North Sea”. This policy is aimed at driving down consumer energy bills. However, previous failures from the former Conservative government to reduce household energy costs have made many wary of the Party’s promises.

The current U.K. government has introduced an array of energy policies and financial incentives in recent months to support a green transition and aims to achieve the net-zero target by 2050, which was written into law by then-Conservative leader Theresa May in 2019. The government believes that diversifying the energy mix will not only strengthen long-term energy security but will also, ultimately, drive down energy bills.

The focus for many now is a just transition. Many in the oil and gas industry are concerned about what a sudden withdrawal from the North Sea will mean for workers and communities in the region. The government now has the potential to use the new investor interest in the green energy sector to support a just transition and ensure people do not get left behind.

Europe’s cities have changed dramatically in size and shape since 1975. Urban areas across the continent have sprawled outward, merging into large corridors of continuous development. This visualization, via Visual Capitalist’s Marcus Lu, highlights the urban growth of major European cities, showing how population and settlement patterns have evolved.

The data for this map comes from World Population Review and Copernicus.

The Largest Urban Areas

Moscow leads as Europe’s most populous city, with over 12.7 million people projected by 2025. Paris follows closely with 11.3 million, while London ranks third with nearly 10 million. These cities have long histories of urban development and continue to expand, both in terms of area and density.

Southern Europe’s Urban Growth

Madrid and Barcelona have a combined urban population exceeding 12.5 million. Italian cities like Rome, Milan, and Naples also feature prominently, reflecting decades of steady growth tied to industry and migration.

Fast-Growing Second-Tier Cities

Several cities outside the traditional top three have seen striking increases in population since 1975. Madrid’s urban population nearly doubled from 3.9 million to 6.8 million, while Kyiv grew from 1.9 million to nearly 2.8 million. Birmingham saw the most dramatic percentage rise—from just 583,000 to over 2.7 million.

From Lisbon to Saint Petersburg, most of the featured cities experienced substantial population growth over the past five decades.

If you enjoyed today’s post, check out Ranked: European Countries With the Most Immigrants on Voronoi, the new app from Visual Capitalist.

Submitted by Thomas Kolbe

The collapse of the German economy is now becoming visible even in the labor market. Yet instead of pushing for a political turnaround with deregulation measures and genuine relief, the federal government limits itself to empty rhetoric and media appearances. In Berlin, PR is mistaken for economic policy—propagandistic fragments are presented as proof of achievement.

It was a week of media presence for the Chancellor. Friedrich Merz staged visibility: speeches, press conferences, appearances on German Unity Day, and the first cabinet retreat at Villa Borsig. He even tackled the new swarms of drones—with emphatic rhetoric, as if these threats, according to panicked press reports, were undermining citizens’ trust in security and airspace control—and immediately called for border measures.

Had we not learned over the past decade that border control was impossible? Wasn’t this the mantra, particularly for the CDU, during the Merkel-era invasion crisis?

But never mind. It’s not just the borders crumbling due to political inaction and a lack of will to solve problems.

Rhetorically and Physically Present

Merz was omnipresent, rhetorically and physically. At the Unity Day ceremony in Saarbrücken, the Chancellor even attempted emotional bridges with the audience.

He invoked social cohesion, called for optimism and a “new beginning,” spoke of courage, initiative, and the challenges posed by autocracies, digitalization, and geopolitical change.

Germany, Merz said, stands in Autumn 2025 at a “decisive moment” in its history, a phase that may determine the nation’s future. Despite economic and security tensions, one must “look ahead with confidence and vigor” and strive for a “new unity” in the country. Citizens should not be paralyzed by fear but, like East Germans 35 years ago, dare their own new beginning.

What was meant as an appeal to the spirit of 1989 sounded more like empty morale-boosting slogans—subtle blame-shifting that puts the burden of the crisis on ordinary citizens.

Economically Bleak

The economic outlook is so grim that even Berlin’s normally insulated news bubble cannot entirely shield the Chancellor’s office from daily shocks in the German economy.

Mild Pressure, No Consequences

Fragments of criticism from Germany’s bureaucratic and union circles appear to have reached the Chancellor’s office. Industrial CEOs complain daily about ruinous energy costs. The grotesque regulations that strangle the country are conveniently ignored—they prevent the few innovative SMEs from becoming serious competition.

Yet when companies like Bosch cut 22,000 jobs, Mercedes scraps an electric vehicle project to return to combustion engines, and entire supply chains of basic industry vanish, political action is required.

But no one dares, even verbally, to strike at the root of this civilization-destroying policy—the green agenda shared by nearly all in Berlin, except the AfD. It embodies faith in centralized power in Brussels, paving the way for the “United States of Europe,” whatever its architects may envision.

Merz and Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil—the true debt kings of our era—seriously believe that pumping a few hundred billion euros into failing projects will get the country moving again. An intellectual bankruptcy, and more: proof of structural delusion—ideological and intellectual.

Laughable “Reforms”

Merz’s response to deindustrialization and social crisis is surprisingly simple: a few media appearances, the “Made for Germany” coffee sessions, or announcing a “reform autumn” should suffice to prove the economy is turning around. It’s always the public’s bad mood, according to Merz—the eternal grumbler who simply doesn’t appreciate the hard work of policymakers.

In material terms, this government achieves nothing. In the distant future, companies might receive modest corporate tax relief—a few billion euros, laughable compared to a federal government budget of over €520 billion next year. A two-year temporary depreciation? A trivial gesture.

It is particularly cynical when the government celebrates simplified car registration or a new bureaucratic portal as groundbreaking deregulation while the administrative apparatus continues to consume billions unchecked.

For context: the ifo Institute estimates the direct and indirect costs of Germany’s bureaucracy at around €146 billion annually—over three percent of GDP.

In a country with a state share beyond 50%, this is nothing less than a confession of impotence: a document of inaction, overextension, or deliberate planning by the government—results unchanged.

Old Political Tales

Merz and Klingbeil repeat old political fables: bureaucracy will be reduced by €16 billion, eight percent of personnel cut. Believers may rejoice. Meanwhile, debates have already started about building new bureaucracies to manage the massive subsidy flows favoring green and military cronies in coming years.

Talk of deregulation is just a slogan, a hollow phrase, compulsively repeated by speechwriters. Reality: thousands of new positions at local and state levels, sold as “employment success.” Welcome to today’s political parallel universe.

It is telling that during this orchestrated week, neither the planned inheritance tax increase nor the end of spousal tax splitting proposed by Klingbeil were mentioned. All of this is media theater—distractions, smoke bombs—meant to suggest the problem has been recognized and addressed. In reality, it’s political simulation perfected to emptiness.

Actual Situation

The reality for the economy and citizens is very different. Merz allows the ever-increasing, grotesque CO₂ tax to pass without resistance—a bow to Brussels. Citizens feel the impact at the checkout as prices surge across daily essentials.

Meanwhile, municipalities respond to the green regulatory-induced economic crisis with tax hikes: the minimum business tax rate factor nationwide rises from 200 to 280 points—a costly measure that will eliminate thousands of jobs.

Since 2018, mismanaged policy has eliminated roughly 1.3 million private-sector jobs while the state created over 420,000 new public-sector positions—spinning the debt spiral ever faster.

A genuine reform would have broken this deadly cycle. It would have had the courage to finally address the migration crisis—rather than delaying debates over the migration-related citizens’ allowance through semantic smoke screens and political procrastination.

Nothing but Hot Air

Given the government’s disastrous record, one wonders: can’t they, won’t they, or aren’t they allowed? Whatever the reason for this political paralysis, Merz is the archetype of someone who simulates work with remarkable consistency—omnipresent, loud, center-stage—yet delivers nothing but hot air.

We know this game: the classic stalling tactic, backed by Berlin-Brussels consensus on the ideological agenda: social restructuring, centralized energy control, a monitored financial system, and the installation of a censored public sphere.

The media plays, channeling the 1990s, embodied by a Chancellor whose social media team reproduces tone, posture, and content from a past era, are proof. The Chancellor’s office believes it can regain air superiority over narratives and public opinion. Repeated messages, intensified public broadcaster propaganda, European censorship laws—all aimed to silence dissent and relegate serious opposition to “far-right conspiracy theories.”

In summary, this orchestrated week demonstrates once more how the political-media complex buys time by scattering sand into critics’ gears. Time to prepare the actual “reforms” underway elsewhere: a digital euro as a capital control, a UK-style digital ID, and accelerated wartime economic mobilization against an imminent Russian threat.

If this is the promised “autumn of reforms,” buckle up.

* * * 

About the author: Thomas Kolbe has worked as a journalist and media producer for clients from various industries and business associations. As a publicist, he focuses on economic processes and observes geopolitical events from the perspective of the capital markets. His publications follow a philosophy that focuses on the individual and their right to self-determination.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned that any Washington decision to supply Ukraine with long-range Tomahawk missiles for strikes deep into Russian territory would irreparably damage Moscow’s relations with Washington.

The warning comes less than two months after Putin met with President Donald Trump at a summit in Alaska, which sought de-escalation in Ukraine and was focused on improving bilateral relations. But now Putin is making clear that these relations could be destroyed, also at a moment the extension to the New START nuclear treaty has left some breathing room for nuclear negotiations.

“This will lead to the destruction of our relationship. Or at least the emerging positive trends in this relationship. So I’m saying what I think. And how things turn out depends not only on us,” Putin said in a fresh interview with Russian journalist Pavel Zarubin, parts of which were widely published Sunday.

Given the Tomahawk missile has a range of at least 1,500 miles, it could potentially hit Moscow and offices of Kremlin leaders, unleashing the likelihood of runaway escalation toward WW3. This is basically what Moscow is now warning about.

Already the US has said it is assisting Kiev with long-range targeting, which has included daily drone warfare, sometimes reaching over 800 miles into Russia with strikes on energy facilities. Probably such intel-sharing had long been happening for years in the war.

Vice President J.D. Vance had last week indicated the US is looking into the European request to send Tomahawks, and the Kremlin has said it would be deeply surprised if the US took this step.

Still, Trump has voiced frustration with Putin, going so far as to call Russia a “paper tiger” for its inability to quickly and decisively defeat Ukraine.

Yet it should be remembered that Russia’s actions are still only at the level of “Special Military Operation” and a full war mobilization has not been ordered.

Moscow has not revealed an intent to utterly destroy Kiev, and for the most part has not begun obliterating ‘decision-making’ centers, leaving open a chance for de-escalation.

Putin also last Thursday separately pointed out it was impossible to use Tomahawks without the direct participation of American specialists and thus any supply of these missiles to Ukraine would trigger a “qualitatively new stage of escalation.”

“This will mean a completely new, qualitatively new stage of escalation, including in relations between Russia and the United States,” Putin emphasized.

Cracker Barrel has fired the marketing agency responsible for its controversial woke logo design, which the company quickly backtracked on after public outcry. 

In an Oct. 2 statement, the company said that it was ending its relationship with California-based strategic and creative growth consultancy, Prophet, which had advised them on brand refresh initiatives – including the recent logo and restaurant redesigns that did not go over well, to put it mildly. 

The company also accepted the resignation of SVP Laura Daily, who had been with the company since 2012. 

“We are grateful to Laura for her leadership, including being a driving force behind the growth of our retail business during her tenure, and thank Cammie for the meaningful contributions and impact she made through her nearly a decade at the Company,” said CEO Julie Masino.

Masino – who gets to keep her job, announced the new logo on Aug. 19. The following day the company’s market cap crashed by nearly $100 million. One week later, Cracker Barrel announced that it would return to the old logo. 

“We thank our guests for sharing your voices and love for Cracker Barrel. We said we would listen, and we have. Our new logo is going away, and our ‘Old Timer’ will remain,” the company said in a statement. 

Other corporate shuffling includes the promotion of Doug Hisel – previously vice president (VP) of field operations, who is now the senior vice president (SVP) of store operations. He has been with the company for 18 years. 

Meanwhile, former employee Thomas Yun is rejoining the company as vice president for menu strategy and innovation. 

“These changes to our organizational structure, along with new leadership appointments and promotions, mark a strategic step forward as we sharpen our focus on consistently craveable food and warm country hospitality,” said Masino. “This transition reduces layers in the organization as we bring a hyperfocus on ensuring both every plate served and every interaction with our guests reflects the care and quality we stand for.”

As the Epoch Times notes further, President Donald Trump had also called on Cracker Barrel to give up its new redesign. Trump welcomed the switchback in an Aug. 27 Truth Social post.

“Congratulations, Cracker Barrel, on changing your logo back to what it was,” he wrote. “All of your fans very much appreciate it. Good luck into the future. Make lots of money and, most importantly, make your customers happy again!”

Cracker Barrel announced its full fiscal year 2025 financial results on Sept. 17.

The company reported $3.48 billion in revenues for the year, up 0.4 percent from the previous fiscal year. Net income was up 13.3 percent, while earnings per share jumped 12.6 percent.

“Many elements of our plan are working well and delivering results, as evidenced by five consecutive quarters of comparable store restaurant sales increases and 9 percent adjusted EBITDA growth in fiscal 2025,” Masino said. EBITDA refers to earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization.

“Looking ahead, there is much to be optimistic about, and our teams are focused on getting back to the momentum we created last fiscal year.”

For fiscal year 2026, the company is expecting revenues in the range of $3.35 billion to $3.45 billion. It projects opening two new Cracker Barrel stores and shutting down 14 Maple Street units. Cracker Barrel acquired biscuit company Maple Street in 2019.

Submitted by Jacob Burg of  Epoch Times

President Donald Trump is sending 300 members of the California National Guard to Oregon after a judge temporarily blocked him from deploying the Beaver State’s guard to Portland, California Gov. Gavin Newsom said on Oct. 5. 

Newsom vowed to fight the move in court.

The White House on Oct. 5 did not immediately confirm the deployment. The California National Guard referred questions to the Department of War. A War Department spokesperson declined to comment.

In a statement posted to his website, Newsom called Trump’s mobilization of hundreds of California National Guardsmen to Oregon a “breathtaking abuse of the law and power.”

“The Trump Administration is unapologetically attacking the rule of law itself and putting into action their dangerous words—ignoring court orders and treating judges, even those appointed by the President himself, as political opponents,” Newsom said.

“The commander-in-chief is using the U.S. military as a political weapon against American citizens. We will take this fight to court, but the public cannot stay silent in the face of such reckless and authoritarian conduct by the President of the United States.”

Months ago, Trump federalized California’s National Guard over Newsom’s objection following protests in Los Angeles against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents.

A federal judge on Oct. 4 temporarily blocked Trump from deploying the Oregon National Guard to Portland in response to violent protests targeting immigration officers.

“This country has a longstanding and foundational tradition of resistance to government overreach, especially in the form of military intrusion into civil affairs,” Judge Karin J. Immergut, of the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon, wrote in her order.

“This historical tradition boils down to a simple proposition: this is a nation of Constitutional law, not martial law. Defendants have made a range of arguments that, if accepted, risk blurring the line between civil and military federal power—to the detriment of this nation.”

U.S. District Judge Michael Simon recused himself from the case when the Department of Justice filed papers with the court accusing Simon’s wife, Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.), of publicly criticizing Trump’s plan.

Immergut was randomly assigned to the case after the recusal, a court clerk told Simon.

National Guard in Portland, Chicago

Portland’s ICE building has been the scene of nightly protests, and Trump described Portland as a “war zone” rife with crime and unrest. Trump also called Chicago a “war zone.”

Trump ultimately authorized the deployment of 300 Illinois National Guard troops on Oct. 4 to protect federal agents and assets in Chicago.

White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson confirmed the deployment in a statement to The Epoch Times.

“Amidst ongoing violent riots and lawlessness, that local leaders like Pritzker have refused to step in to quell, President Trump has authorized 300 national guardsmen to protect federal officers and assets,” she said. “President Trump will not turn a blind eye to the lawlessness plaguing American cities.”

Pritzker accused the Trump administration of attempting to escalate tensions amid ongoing clashes between protesters and federal officers in the Chicago area.

“It is absolutely outrageous and un-American to demand a Governor send military troops within our own borders and against our will,” Pritzker wrote in an Oct. 4 statement. “They will pull hardworking Americans out of their regular jobs and away from their families all to participate in a manufactured performance—not a serious effort to protect public safety.”

Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Missouri Gov. Mike Kehoe said on Sept. 30 that he has authorized the state’s National Guard troops to provide administrative and logistical support to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) law enforcement operations in the state.

The authorization came in response to a request from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to the Department of War (DOW), according to a statement released by the governor’s office.

It stated that National Guard troops will be authorized to assist with “administrative, clerical, and logistical duties,” such as data entry and case management at ICE processing facilities starting on Oct. 1.

They are authorized to assist ICE until Sept. 30, 2026, the governor’s office stated. Kehoe, a Republican, said that this support is intended to enable ICE personnel to focus on “core enforcement and security functions” across the state.

“Public safety, keeping Missourians safe, and upholding the rule of law is our administration’s top priority,” the governor said in the statement.

“The Missouri National Guard is uniquely equipped to provide this essential administrative support, and we are confident their contributions will be invaluable to immigration enforcement efforts.”

His office stated that Secretary of War Pete Hegseth on July 25 authorized federal funding for members of the National Guard to provide support to DHS at ICE processing facilities through Title 32, which allows guard members to perform missions for the Army, Air Force, president, or war secretary with the permission of the governor.

Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas, a Democrat, issued a statement denouncing the governor’s decision, saying that it would divert National Guard service members from their mission of protecting the public.

“Using the brave women and men of our National Guard as paper pushers and case managers at immigration facilities undermines their mission and the law, directs them away from the important storm-response and local public safety efforts Missourians care about, and marks another example of Missouri public policy operating for the interests of Washington elites rather than every day Missourians,” he stated.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) also condemned Kehoe’s move to authorize National Guard troops to assist with ICE operations amid the Trump administration’s ongoing immigration crackdown.

“With the backdrop of masked immigration agents breaking apart our families and communities, it is particularly concerning that the Governor is asking Guard members to voluntarily participate in this agenda,” Luz María Henríquez, executive director at the ACLU of Missouri, said in a statement.

Missouri’s authorization came just days after Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landy sent a letter to DOW on Sept. 29 requesting the deployment of 1,000 Louisiana National Guard troops to support law enforcement agencies.

The DHS also has asked the Pentagon and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker to allow the deployment of 100 military personnel to Illinois “for the protection of ICE personnel and facilities” after clashes erupted between protesters and federal agents outside an ICE processing facility in Broadview, Pritzker said.

Pritzker told reporters on Sept. 29 that he opposes the troop deployment.

Last week, President Donald Trump ordered the deployment of National Guard troops to Portland, Oregon, under Title 10, Section 12406 of the U.S. Code, in the wake of escalating clashes outside federal immigration facilities. In response, the state of Oregon filed a lawsuit on Sept. 28, alleging that Trump had exceeded his executive authority in ordering the deployment.

Trump has already deployed troops to Los Angeles and the District of Columbia, and he has threatened to send them to Baltimore,  New Orleans, and Memphis, Tennessee, as part of a broader fight against urban crime.

Tom Ozimek contributed to this report.

Authored by Brad Jones via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

About 60 students walked out of morning classes on Oct. 1 to protest their high school’s policy allowing male students who identify as transgender to use girls’ bathrooms, in Anaheim, California.

Joining the students at a press conference at Esperanza High School, opponents of state polices allowing transgender-identifying males to compete in girls’ and women’s sports and use female bathrooms and locker rooms said it’s time for the Trump administration to follow through on its threats to withhold federal funding from schools accused of violating Title IX.

Sophia Lorey, outreach director at California Family Council and former college soccer athlete, told The Epoch Times the federal government “should start pulling and withholding federal funding, especially in states such as California that “continue to put girls in harm’s way.”

“It’s time that these lawsuits start playing out,” Lorey said following the press conference.

Although many parents believe Title IX violations aren’t an issue if their children aren’t playing sports, she said, the walkout showed that all girls in high school who simply want to safely use the restroom are affected, Lorey said.

California lawmakers in 2013 passed Assembly Bill 1266, which allowed males who identify as transgender to use girls’ restrooms.

At the walkout—attended by about 35 female and 25 male students—Lorey accused state lawmakers of failing to protect girls.

“These students have taken it into their own hands to lead a student walkout, to stand strong and say they are not OK with boys in the girls’ restrooms,” she said.

The girls voiced concerns about a male student using the girls’ bathroom, and that it makes them feel uncomfortable and unsafe.

Lesley Ledesma, a junior student who led the walkout, said a transgender-identifying male has been using the girls’ restrooms. And, when she complained to the school administrators, she was told that if she felt uncomfortable sharing the bathroom with him, she could use the one in the nurse’s office instead.

“This felt like a slap in the face to me,” she said. “As a young woman who has used the girls’ bathroom my entire life, I was now being asked to step aside. It didn’t feel fair. It didn’t feel respectful. It felt like my concerns, and the concerns of other girls, were being overlooked.”

Ledesma, who has attended Esperanza since her freshman year, said the incident stripped away the sense of safety she once felt at school.

“Everyone deserves dignity,” she said. “But dignity cannot come at the cost of someone else’s sense of safety. We must find a solution that protects the rights and feelings of all students, not just some.”

Eddie Ledesma, her brother, said it’s hard to watch his sister struggle.

“I want her and all the other girls here to feel safe in a place [that] should be private,” he said. “This isn’t about hate. It’s about respect.”

Sonja Shaw, Chino Valley Unified school board president and a parental rights advocate, said at the walkout that because gender ideology has been normalized to the point where girls are told to sacrifice their privacy, safety, and dignity to accommodate boys in restrooms, the fight to protect girls has become a nationwide effort.

“This isn’t progress. This is regression. This is hate on girls,” she said. “This is the hill that we will die on to protect our kids. We are done. We’re not playing these games.”

If California continues to push gender ideology in schools, the problem will only get worse, she said.

“We have allowed radicals and special interests to push this madness, and too many officials have stayed silent or defended policies that put children at risk.”

Shaw said via text message to The Epoch Times following the press conference that “it’s not just time to consider withholding federal funding, it’s already time to act.”

The governor, state legislators, California Interscholastic Federation, and “too many school boards,” she said, have made it very clear they’re not budging on this issue.

“Title IX was written to protect girls, not erase them,” Shaw said. “If schools and states refuse to comply with that, then federal funding should be pulled.”

President Donald Trump’s executive orders recognize two sexes—male and female—and make it clear that only females belong in girls’ and women’s sports and in female bathrooms and locker rooms.

“‘Sex’ is not a synonym for and does not include the concept of ‘gender identity,’” read Trump’s Jan. 20 executive order “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.”

“‘Gender identity’ reflects a fully internal and subjective sense of self, disconnected from biological reality and sex and existing on an infinite continuum, that does not provide a meaningful basis for identification and cannot be recognized as a replacement for sex.”

The president also signed an executive order titled “Keeping Men out of Women’s Sports” in February.

The two orders reversed Biden-era Title IX policies and reinstated regulations from Trump’s first term as president. The back-and-forth changes in regulations have led to legal disputes about Title IX interpretation and enforcement.

The Trump administration on Sept. 30 warned of legal action against the Minnesota Department of Education and the Minnesota State High School League for allegedly failing to comply with Title IX, which prohibits sex discrimination in federally funded educational programs.

In June, the U.S. Department of Education concluded its Title IX investigations into the California Department of Education and the California Interscholastic Federation for allegations of discrimination against women and girls on the basis of sex. In both cases, the California Department of Education and the Interscholastic Federation were found to be in violation, and Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said the Trump administration would “relentlessly enforce Title IX protections for women and girls.”

The California Department of Education has authority over California Interscholastic Federation, which oversees 1.8 million high school students and more than 750,000 student-athletes, according to the DOJ.

In July, the Department of Justice (DOJ) launched a lawsuit against California, alleging the state’s laws promoting transgender athletes violate Title IX by depriving girls of equal athletic opportunities.

“California is on the wrong side of the law and the wrong side of history,” U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli said in a statement. “Women deserve dignity, respect, and an equal opportunity to compete on their own sports teams. The time for talk is over. California must comply with Title IX and end its civil rights violations against women.”

Tony Hoang, executive director of Equality California, an LGBT civil rights group, said in June that the federal education department’s findings were “a dangerous distortion of Title IX and a direct attack on transgender youth in California.”

“Let’s be clear: this isn’t about fairness in sports and never has been — it’s about a federal administration weaponizing civil rights laws to target transgender students and force California to comply with their hateful anti-transgender agenda,” Hoang wrote in a statement. “Transgender youth belong in our schools, on our teams, and in our communities — without apology and without exception.”

The governor’s office did not respond to an inquiry by publication time.

In his own podcast aired in March, Newsom told his guest, conservative commentator Charlie Kirk, who was assassinated last month at a college campus in Utah, that allowing men to compete in women’s sports is “deeply unfair.”

Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener praised Newsom for his past efforts to defend and support people in the LGBT community and criticized the governor for the remark.

The governor has since discussed fairness in sports, while opposing federal attempts to roll back state laws and policies.

Chevron’s 285,000 b/d El Segundo refinery in Los Angeles County suffered a major fire late Thursday, the cause of which remains unclear amid mounting speculation on X. Although the blaze was extinguished by Friday afternoon, multiple unplanned flare events have been reported since then, indicating potential issues with refining production or equipment failures in critical units. The longer the disruption at one of the most critical refineries on the West Coast continues, the greater the potential impact on Southern California fuel prices – a region home to major military installations and key port infrastructure, which only raises the question about energy security and whether this incident was an industrial accident or something more deliberate. 

In recent days, the Segundo refinery has experienced multiple unplanned flare events, which typically indicate a process upset or equipment malfunction that requires operators to burn off excess hydrocarbons for safety reasons. 

Chevron’s refinery — the company’s 2nd biggest site in the US — in El Segundo, outside los Angeles went bang last night at around 9pm local, people were saying they thot they got nuked, feeling the blast!

* Someone got a drone up an gave us 5mins ov footage ov this shitstorm… pic.twitter.com/l8Pp37alAP

— Raggy… (@raggymerchant) October 3, 2025

Flarings occur when refinery systems (like compressors, distillation units, or heat exchangers) suddenly fail or pressure builds up unexpectedly. To prevent explosions or toxic gas releases, the flare system activates and burns the gases instead of a vented release. 

Some of the typical causes of flare events:

• Compressor or pump failure 

• Power outage or voltage drop 

• Sudden feedstock quality change

• Overpressure event in distillation or cracking units 

• Instrumentation/control system malfunction

There’s been no word from El Segundo refinery officials about the cause of the two unplanned flare events, and no official statement has yet been released on what triggered Thursday night’s explosion at the facility.

On Friday, Bloomberg cited Wood Mackenzie, which said shutdowns include a 60,000 b/d catalytic reformer, a 45,000 b/d hydrocracker, a 73,000 b/d fluid catalytic cracker (FCC), and two hydrogen plants. The fire began in the convection section of a furnace tied to the Hydrocracker/ISOMAX complex. This area of the refinery produces diesel and jet fuel.

Goldman analyst Adam Wijaya warned clients on Friday that “$8 gasoline concerns are very real for CA” following the fire at the refinery (read report). 

In a separate note, Goldman analyst James McGeoch noted: What looks like a large fire at CVX’s el Segundo refinery in California. 280kbpd nameplate, around 100kbpd of gasoline and the same jet/diesel. Cali is quite a contained mkt but if it’s offline for a while it’ll have some spillover to broader mid-west US (+BP) and global jet (+ve REP).

The refinery is situated in the heart of Southern California’s military-industrial complex, located down the street from major military bases, and fuels the Port of Los Angeles and the Port of Long Beach, two ports that handle 40% of all U.S. containerized imports. 

We asked a very simple question: “Is someone sabotaging it?”